HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > General Development


View Poll Results: Which transbay tower design scheme do you like best?
#1 Richard Rogers 39 7.88%
#2 Cesar Pelli 98 19.80%
#3 SOM 358 72.32%
Voters: 495. You may not vote on this poll

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #301  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2007, 5:53 PM
Reminiscence's Avatar
Reminiscence Reminiscence is offline
Green Berniecrat
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Richmond/Eureka, CA
Posts: 1,689
I must say, I was not expecting Norman Foster to be eliminated until very deep into the design process. Perhaps with the exception of SF Intl Airport, the notable achievements listed are not too appealing to me, at least for something of this caliber.
__________________
Reject the lesser evil and fight for the greater good like our lives depend on it, because they do!
-- Dr. Jill Stein, 2016 Green Party Presidential Candidate
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #302  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2007, 6:37 PM
wrab's Avatar
wrab wrab is offline
Deerhoof Evangelist
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,667
It'd be nice to see Rogers pick up a major US project - he's done some wonderful stuff in Europe over the years.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #303  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2007, 9:16 PM
CityKid CityKid is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: BK,NY/SF,CA/LB,CA
Posts: 480
I'm not too familiar with architects, but Santiago Calatrava's name definitely stands out to me. I can't wait to see what they come up with!
__________________
Everytime you drive to the grocery store, you are killing a polar bear.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #304  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2007, 11:40 PM
BTinSF BTinSF is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: San Francisco & Tucson
Posts: 24,088
This being San Francisco, 350 Mission is no longer 850'. See http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=125819
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #305  
Old Posted Feb 17, 2007, 3:58 AM
Reminiscence's Avatar
Reminiscence Reminiscence is offline
Green Berniecrat
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Richmond/Eureka, CA
Posts: 1,689
^^^

Hopefully our other new little 800' tower proposal at 177 Fremont wont suffer the same fate
__________________
Reject the lesser evil and fight for the greater good like our lives depend on it, because they do!
-- Dr. Jill Stein, 2016 Green Party Presidential Candidate
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #306  
Old Posted Feb 17, 2007, 5:47 AM
kenratboy kenratboy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 1,050
Don't worry, with all the projects on the table, and the way the market is in the city, I have a feeling quite a few good things will be built.

It is unthinkable to imagine ALL of the projects would be built, or built as planned. If Transbay really happens and we see at least one 1,000' building, I will be very happy (but I really welcome the transit improvements, and street-level benefits!)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #307  
Old Posted Feb 17, 2007, 6:33 AM
BTinSF BTinSF is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: San Francisco & Tucson
Posts: 24,088
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reminisence View Post
^^^

Hopefully our other new little 800' tower proposal at 177 Fremont wont suffer the same fate
Oh, my. Now I get these sites all mixed up in my head. But today's BizTimes also has this to say:

Quote:
SKS Development . . . is reportedly taking a hard look at 185 Fremont St., a potential office development site in Foundry Square. Across the street from the Barclay's Building under construction at Foundry Square I, the site was pitched as a home for a 23-story, 250,000 square foot office tower. Sources say SKS is leaning toward a mixed use building with office and residential units.
Am I wrong in thinking that 177 and 185 Fremont are really part of the same site? If so, I'm not sure what this story means for your 800 footer. But if it was proposed at 23 stories, could it suddenly grow to 800 feet?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #308  
Old Posted Feb 17, 2007, 7:26 PM
Reminiscence's Avatar
Reminiscence Reminiscence is offline
Green Berniecrat
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Richmond/Eureka, CA
Posts: 1,689
Well, I dont remember exactly, but I think 177-183 Fremont is the larger building to the north (closest to the Transbay Terminal). That site is proposed for the 800' tower. The smaller bordering building to the south, I believe, is 185 Fremont, or what these guys are looking at. So if everything goes as they say, I think we'll end up with an 800' tower and a shorter ~300' midrise next to it.
__________________
Reject the lesser evil and fight for the greater good like our lives depend on it, because they do!
-- Dr. Jill Stein, 2016 Green Party Presidential Candidate
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #309  
Old Posted Feb 17, 2007, 9:35 PM
SFView SFView is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,044
I am not sure exactly where 185 Fremont is, but I was able to scrounge up this...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #310  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2007, 9:50 AM
briankendall briankendall is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 72
177 & 183 Fremont

The map is exactly right. There is only 177 and 183 Fremont. Those two small parcels. Where it says 193 I think is the entrance way to the tall building in back 199 Fremont with the small plaza in front (and behind 177 and 183). Not sure where 185 came from. I know a couple of people who work for SKS maybe I should ask one of them next week and report back.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #311  
Old Posted Feb 20, 2007, 5:25 PM
rocketman_95046's Avatar
rocketman_95046 rocketman_95046 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: SD/SJ, CA, USA
Posts: 1,879
courtesy of Jack from SFCityscape...and the Transbay Redevelopment District..


http://www.sfcityscape.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=35
__________________
1,000 posts and still going...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #312  
Old Posted Feb 20, 2007, 5:32 PM
kenratboy kenratboy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 1,050
Woo hoo! Lets see how many of these so called 'limits' we can shatter!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #313  
Old Posted Mar 22, 2007, 8:37 PM
AJphx AJphx is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 944
Quote:
Originally Posted by wrabbit View Post
It'd be nice to see Rogers pick up a major US project
world trade center.

buy yeah it would be great for him to get more projects here.... the other guys, calatrava, pelli, and som all have many other current projects in the US.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #314  
Old Posted Mar 23, 2007, 5:38 AM
SFView SFView is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,044
From the Transbay CAC Housing Presentation of March 14, 2007:
http://sfgov.org/site/sfra_page.asp?id=5583#D4D

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #315  
Old Posted Mar 23, 2007, 10:47 PM
Reminiscence's Avatar
Reminiscence Reminiscence is offline
Green Berniecrat
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Richmond/Eureka, CA
Posts: 1,689
Intresting graphic. Me, personally, I hope they shatter these height limits. That proposed unlimited height and FAR is something I'd like to learn more about.
__________________
Reject the lesser evil and fight for the greater good like our lives depend on it, because they do!
-- Dr. Jill Stein, 2016 Green Party Presidential Candidate
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #316  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2007, 12:56 AM
SFView SFView is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,044
The "Unrestriced FAR, height" zone might not be in the same area as shown in the "Zone One Plan" above:

From Transbay Dowtown Heights Study, May 31, 2006
http://sfgov.org/site/uploadedfiles/...20Proposal.pdf
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #317  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2007, 1:39 AM
Reminiscence's Avatar
Reminiscence Reminiscence is offline
Green Berniecrat
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Richmond/Eureka, CA
Posts: 1,689
I would think that the Transit Tower falls inside this zone, but I'm not so sure about Piano's 5 towers. I havent heard exactly what the boundaries of this zone is, but it looks to be in the vicinity of this Zone 1.
__________________
Reject the lesser evil and fight for the greater good like our lives depend on it, because they do!
-- Dr. Jill Stein, 2016 Green Party Presidential Candidate
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #318  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2007, 5:58 AM
SFView SFView is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,044
So far, every new building in San Francisco discussed or conceptualized at 700 feet or taller on this forum, including all the Piano Towers, will be within the planned unlimited height and FAR zone. 555 Mission, 535 Mission, Millenium Tower and 524 Howard will also be within this possible new zone, but are projects constructed, or may be constructed before any upzoning approvals occur in or around 2009. At least, the final height of 350 Mission may be pending such an upzoning approval. If upzoning is approved as currently planned, the entire unlimited height and FAR zone will be within a 2/3 block area, north, south and adjacent to the new Transbay Terminal only.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #319  
Old Posted Mar 24, 2007, 6:16 AM
Reminiscence's Avatar
Reminiscence Reminiscence is offline
Green Berniecrat
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Richmond/Eureka, CA
Posts: 1,689
^^^

Right, thats the idea I had too, just wase'nt very clear on it. Thanks for clearing that up.
__________________
Reject the lesser evil and fight for the greater good like our lives depend on it, because they do!
-- Dr. Jill Stein, 2016 Green Party Presidential Candidate
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #320  
Old Posted Apr 3, 2007, 4:41 PM
SFView SFView is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,044
March 1, 2007 Stage II Briefing presentation on the Transbay Center and Tower (pdf):
Quote:
Likely max height will fall in 800'-1,200' range
http://www.transbaycenter.org/TransB...PA%20FINAL.pdf
Plenty of nice diagrams, preliminary (pre-competition) CAD drawings and renderings - mention of other current and new development sites surrounding the terminal.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > General Development
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:49 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.